dsheinem wrote:I recently spoke to an editor in chief for one of the top 5 or so game-related websites who told me in his many, many years he's never seen or heard of scores for money or favors outside of that one infamous he said/she said Gamespot debacle. I believe him.

It's hard to believe that a high-end editor in chief is going to turn whistle-blower even if they were doing that. I believe he/she is probably telling the truth. The thing that makes doubt is how the hell they make so much money?! I mean other than Youtube, Ad's and some miscellaneous things, it's basically free content. If I use Ad Blocker I've essentially taken away almost half the money they're going to make off me. I think that's it's because of this missing variable and IGN's/various sites shady practices (handing out 10's to every hyped game) that people conclude they're taking money for reviews.

I'd say the most professional reviewers get as incentive to up scores is stuff like extra copies, merch, early/exclusive access for the first official review. Reviews don't mean enough for game publishers to pay for, especially not with the advent of the internet and so many free resources available.

brunoafh wrote:I'd say the most professional reviewers get as incentive to up scores is stuff like extra copies, merch, early/exclusive access for the first official review. Reviews don't mean enough for game publishers to pay for, especially not with the advent of the internet and so many free resources available.

Sure, maybe on small sites but getting a 10 on IGN can make a big difference. The average gamer (COD, Madden, GTA) looks to IGN/big sites for reviews or at least that's what I've noticed.

Getting ready for a midnight release here, when I think of it, the last game that I got at a midnight release was...GTA IV. I was like a lot of other people, where the game was amazing at first, but as you played on, things just were not as fun, and the game became a chore for some reason. I never played past the bank heist.

I was not the least bit excited for GTA V, until the game play trailers started coming out, and I got more information about the game. After that I was sold, and started to get more hyped for this game than any release in recent memory, including Bioshock Infinite, and The Last of Us. The online aspect looks like it will be a blast once it launches, and I have no issue with it not being included with right away. Hopefully this game has more staying power than IV, I am hoping to get lost in it like I did with Vice City so long ago...

I've never been a big fan of the games. The stories and missions of the PS2 games got old fast. I would generally find enjoyment with some sandbox mayhem for a few hours and then it grew old soon as well. So, these aren't really worth buying to me.

brunoafh wrote:I'd say the most professional reviewers get as incentive to up scores is stuff like extra copies, merch, early/exclusive access for the first official review. Reviews don't mean enough for game publishers to pay for, especially not with the advent of the internet and so many free resources available.

Sure, maybe on small sites but getting a 10 on IGN can make a big difference. The average gamer (COD, Madden, GTA) looks to IGN/big sites for reviews or at least that's what I've noticed.

I'd wager that the average gamer doesn't pay any attention to reviews at all.

Hell the fact that people have meltdowns over games getting unfavorable scores before those games are even out suggests to me that a significant portion of gamers only look at scores and read reviews to validate opinions they've already made up their mind about.

Plus, if you think about it for a second, paying for reviews would be a very short-sighted endeavor. Reviews can only help with game sales if people think that the review has credibility. Paying for it destroys that credibility. It's all around a lose-lose in the end.

AppleQueso wrote:Hell the fact that people have meltdowns over games getting unfavorable scores before those games are even out suggests to me that a significant portion of gamers only look at scores and read reviews to validate opinions they've already made up their mind about.

Are you implying that humanity likes to prejudge things and it doesn't want to hear anyone question its opinion? Why that's the most absurd thing I've ever heard.

BoneSnapDeez wrote:The success of a console is determined by how much I enjoy it.

AppleQueso wrote:I'd wager that the average gamer doesn't pay any attention to reviews at all.

Hell the fact that people have meltdowns over games getting unfavorable scores before those games are even out suggests to me that a significant portion of gamers only look at scores and read reviews to validate opinions they've already made up their mind about.

Plus, if you think about it for a second, paying for reviews would be a very short-sighted endeavor. Reviews can only help with game sales if people think that the review has credibility. Paying for it destroys that credibility. It's all around a lose-lose in the end.

Developers get bonuses from the publisher often depending on the metacritic score.

AppleQueso wrote:I'd wager that the average gamer doesn't pay any attention to reviews at all.

Hell the fact that people have meltdowns over games getting unfavorable scores before those games are even out suggests to me that a significant portion of gamers only look at scores and read reviews to validate opinions they've already made up their mind about.

Plus, if you think about it for a second, paying for reviews would be a very short-sighted endeavor. Reviews can only help with game sales if people think that the review has credibility. Paying for it destroys that credibility. It's all around a lose-lose in the end.

Developers get bonuses from the publisher often depending on the metacritic score.

That's developers, not publishers. Developers are probably too busy pulling all-nighters at the whim of their publishers than worrying about the PR game. Paying someone else to get a bonus seems kinda backwards anyway.

AppleQueso wrote:I'd wager that the average gamer doesn't pay any attention to reviews at all.

Hell the fact that people have meltdowns over games getting unfavorable scores before those games are even out suggests to me that a significant portion of gamers only look at scores and read reviews to validate opinions they've already made up their mind about.

Even when I was a kid I use to look up reviews. I didn't know wtf they were talking about but I knew that the higher the number, the better the game. People obviously look at reviews otherwise how would all these people be in business? They might not read them but they definitely google things like '<insert name> IGN review' to see what rating it got. When the average gamer is trying to see if a games good or not, their goning to tend to respect the bigger companies opinions or the 1st one to show up in a google search. Which for the most part is IGN.

Last edited by oxymoron on Tue Sep 17, 2013 2:23 am, edited 1 time in total.